←back to thread

US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

(www.reuters.com)
410 points jjulius | 3 comments | 18 Oct 24 16:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
massysett ◴[19 Oct 24 02:14 UTC] No.41885131[source]▶
"Tesla says on its website its FSD software in on-road vehicles requires active driver supervision and does not make vehicles autonomous."

Despite it being called "Full Self-Driving."

Tesla should be sued out of existence.

replies(9): >>41885238 #>>41885239 #>>41885242 #>>41885290 #>>41885322 #>>41885351 #>>41885429 #>>41885656 #>>41893664 #
systemvoltage[dead post] ◴[19 Oct 24 02:54 UTC] No.41885290[source]▶
[flagged]
mbernstein ◴[19 Oct 24 02:55 UTC] No.41885299[source]▶
Nuclear power adoption is the largest force to combat climate change.
replies(3): >>41885358 #>>41885366 #>>41885469 #
Retric ◴[19 Oct 24 03:10 UTC] No.41885366[source]▶
Historically, hydro has prevented for more CO2 than nuclear by a wide margin. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s...

Looking forward Nuclear isn’t moving the needle. Solar grew more in 2023 alone than nuclear has grown since 1995. Worse nuclear can’t ramp up significantly in the next decade simply due to construction bottlenecks. 40 years ago nuclear could have played a larger role, but we wasted that opportunity.

It’s been helpful, but suggesting it’s going to play a larger role anytime soon is seriously wishful thinking at this point.

replies(4): >>41885405 #>>41885435 #>>41885448 #>>41894615 #
UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 03:21 UTC] No.41885405[source]▶
That just goes to show how incredibly short sighted humanity is. We new about the risk of massive CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels but just ignored it while irrationally demonizing nuclear energy because it is scawy. If humans were sane and able to plan earth would be getting 100% of all electricity from super-efficient 7th generation nuclear reactors.
replies(3): >>41885453 #>>41885494 #>>41886182 #
1. mbernstein ◴[19 Oct 24 03:33 UTC] No.41885453{3}[source]▶
When talking to my parents, I hear a lot about Jane Fonda and the China Syndrome as far as the fears of nuclear power.

She's made the same baseless argument for a long time: "Nuclear power is slow, expensive — and wildly dangerous"

https://ourworldindata.org/nuclear-energy#:~:text=The%20key%....

CO2 issues aside, it's just outright safer than all forms of coal and gas and about as safe as solar and wind, all three of which are a bit safer than hydro (still very safe).

replies(2): >>41885563 #>>41895117 #
2. ◴[19 Oct 24 04:05 UTC] No.41885563[source]▶
3. chgs ◴[20 Oct 24 13:04 UTC] No.41895117[source]▶
She’s two thirds right. It’s slow and expensive.
replies(1): >>41896935 #